DURHAM ARTS CENTER STUDY - FINAL PRESENTATION - January 21, 2003 - Yonah Freemark
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
DURHAM ARTS CENTER STUDY – FINAL PRESENTATION
January 21, 2003
DURHAM ARTS CENTER STUDY – Needs Assessment Summary
Needs Assessment Final Conclusions:
• The market for the arts is large and growing, with an educated,
active population that can support additional activity, ranging from
popular entertainment to the performing arts.
• There is demand for new arts facilities of varying sizes on the part of
local and regional groups.
• There are few high quality venues for the local arts in Durham
County, with a notable lack of facilities for the American Dance
Festival. The demand for facilities outstrips the current supply.
• New arts and entertainment facilities can have significant positive
impacts on the community of Durham.
Clear Channel Entertainment Benchmarks
Clear Channel Benchmarks Raleigh Durham MSA
1.2 million within 1 hour of downtown
Dense population within 1 hour of facility Durham
Strong population growth 56% population growth from 1990 to 2000
Racial diversity MSA, particularly Durham, is very diverse
Large presence of young people and young
Young people and families families
Median income $66,100; 36% higher than
Above average median income national avg.
Majority has attained at least high school 84% of population (25+) has high school
education education or more
Recommendation – The Event Center We endorse the event center concept for the following reasons: • While the population of the MSA is less than communities with similar facilities, the area is one of the fastest growing in the U.S. • The age, income, population and demography of Durham are similar to those found in communities that currently support similar facilities. • Programs to be accommodated in the Event Center are not well- served by current facilities. • There are synergies possible with the location of the event center near the Ballpark and the American Tobacco project. • The project can have significant positive impacts on Durham, particularly if the investment is limited and there is a local financial partner involved in the project. • The other key for the event center is the opportunity to rent out facilities for large corporate events or church groups.
Recommendation – Performing Arts Facilities We also recommend facilities to accommodate ADF and other regional performing arts groups. • The resident and non-resident market for the arts is large, growing and has potential to support more programs in more facilities. • Groups are growing and are confident about their ability to attract audiences to programs and new facilities. • A number of groups would use facilities of similar sizes and shapes, potentially filling the calendar. • There are many regional groups not well served by the current inventory of facilities. • Duke and NCCU arts groups could expand their outreach to the Durham community given adequate downtown facilities. • ADF is considering their long term commitment to Durham. • Arts programs and events have a significant impact on local and state economy, as well as enhancing quality of life and community pride.
Ideal Components (Initial Recommendations)
1. A new large event center (4-5,000 seats) for large-scale touring
music and family programming.
2. A new hall of up to 2,000 seats facility that can accommodate
Durham County-based arts organizations with special attention to the
needs of the American Dance Festival.
3. A 600-800 seat multi-purpose hall.
4. Smaller, multi-purpose, rehearsal, performance and support spaces.
5. Hayti Center improvements.
6. Carolina Theater improvements.
The key question at the end of the Needs Assessment was whether
we could find a way to combine Recommendations 1 and 2.
DURHAM ARTS CENTER STUDY – Physical Planning
DURHAM THEATRE SITE PLAN
The Event Center – 5000 seats
Page Auditorium – 1500 seats
DURHAM THEATRE AUDITORIUM COMPARISON
PLANSThe Event Center – 5000 seats
Page Auditorium – 1500 seats
DURHAM THEATRE AUDITORIUM COMPARISON
SECTIONSDURHAM THEATRE PROPOSAL
SIGHTLINESDURHAM THEATRE PROPOSAL
SECTIONDURHAM THEATRE PROPOSAL ORCHESTRA LEVEL – POP PERFORMANCES
DURHAM THEATRE PROPOSAL ORCHESTRA LEVEL – DANCE/BROADWAY PERFORMANCES
DANCE / BROADWAY
PERFORMANCES
POP
PERFORMANCES DURHAM THEATRE PROPOSAL
BALCONY ONEDANCE / BROADWAY
PERFORMANCES
POP
PERFORMANCES DURHAM THEATRE PROPOSAL
BALCONY TWODANCE / BROADWAY
PERFORMANCES
POP
PERFORMANCES DURHAM THEATRE PROPOSAL
BALCONY
THREEDRAMA CONFIGURATION
ORCHESTRA CONFIGURATION
FLEXIBLE THEATRES CERRITOS
MOVING TOWERSVIEW FROM ABOVE
CEILING OVER AUDITORIUM
DECORATIVE/TECHNICAL CEILING BAYFRONT CENTERAMERICAN DANCE FESTIVAL - DURHAM SITE PLAN
WASHINGTON BUILDINGLower Upper
Level Level
AMERICAN DANCE FESTIVAL DURHAM
WASHINGTON BUILDING – 2 BAYS700 SEAT THEATRE DURHAM SITE PLAN
700 SEAT THEATRE DURHAM
700 SEAT THEATRE DURHAM
700 SEAT THEATRE DURHAM
Preliminary Cost Projections
4,000 seat convertible event center for ADF and others $48 million
A Dodge-quality 4,000 seat event center only $35 million
700-seat theater $18 million
Hayti Center improvements $1.5 million
Carolina Theater upgrades $.5 – 2 million
Arts in American Tobacco – 36,000 sf $6 million
Note: Dodge Theater cost (1998 bid) $35 million
SES estimates a 5,000-seat Event Center today: $45 million
SES suggested quality upgrades $48 millionDURHAM ARTS CENTER STUDY – Business Planning
The Business Plan
Here we investigate the operating implications of recommended facilities:
• The Convertible Event Center:
– Deals and wisdom from comparables
– Ownership and operating relationships
– Accommodating the arts
– Estimates of financial performance
• The Arts in American Tobacco:
– Ownership and operating relationships
– Pro-forma operating budget.
• A Mid-size Hall:
– Ownership and operating relationships
– Pro-forma Operating Budget
• Funding Plan
• Economic Impact AnalysisThe Event Center - Accommodating the Arts
• There are not many examples of arts groups being accommodated in
commercially operating facilities. But there are precedents.
• We would advocate a contractual requirement that the Event Center
supports local arts groups based on an agreed:
– Number of days of access
– Levels of rent and user fees
– Booking horizons and scheduling procedures
– Use of building services
• These accommodations play out in the contract for the overall operation of
the theater and/or through the use of an endowment that subsidizes non-
profit use of the facility.Comparable Projects - History and Experience • Rosemont Theater, Rosemont, Illinois • Oakdale Theatre, Wallingford, Connecticut • Dodge Theatre, Phoenix, Arizona • Next Stage Theater, Grand Prairie, Texas • Kodak Theatre, Hollywood, California • Coral Springs Center for the Arts, Coral Springs, Florida
Rosemont Theater, Rosemont, Illinois • Village of 4,000 comprising 2.5 square miles between O’Hare Airport and downtown Chicago • 5,600 hotel rooms and large convention center. Economy based on conventions and business travelers. Event Center and Theater cater to that audience. • Theatre built late 1980s, financed by municipal bonds from the village in a 23- year tax increment financing (TIF) plan. • Construction began 1993 and was completed in 1995 • Village of Rosemont owns and operates facility, with Clear Channel as the main presenter (not exclusive). All rental revenue returns to the Village. • First five years of operation the Event Center and Theater were under an independent management company, but then turned over operations to Village-employed staff • Annual op budget between $9 and $10 million, deficit between +$1 million and -$2 million, varies year to year. General fund from Convention Center and Theater revenues make up for deficit in down years. No capital reserve. • Village covers all downside risks. Convention Center (attached to theater) has made large profits past five years – theatre is up and down.. • Average activity 4-6 days per month (note they have no commercial operator)
Oakdale Theatre, Wallingford, Connecticut • 1970s Segal family built a partially exposed theatre-in-the-round, by late 80s they decided to sell to developer • 1992 real estate developer bought the theatre and added large structure that became the 5,000-seat Oakdale Theatre. • State of Connecticut awarded a loan of $10 million in a tax incremental financing (TIF) plan to finance 50% of construction costs, but the theatre was a private entity from the beginning – no city involvement in operation or construction. Admissions tax on performances re-paid $10 million loan. • Remaining 50% funded through bank construction financing loan. • Real estate developer designed, built, owned and operated facility. Built for $10,815,000 in six months. Opened in 1996. • Independently owned and operated from 1996-98, and owners did everything: booking, special events, sales, marketing, etc. • 1998 Clear Channel approached owners and bought facility, retaining same operating staff. • 2001, former owner/operator finished term of contract and left. • Currently owned and operated exclusively by Clear Channel. • Corporate rentals have been significant and profitable.
Dodge Theater, Phoenix, Arizona • City had land to develop and was seeking ideas and opportunities. • They were approached by SES with the idea to build a large performing arts venue. • City issued an RFP (required given redevelopment). The condition was that SES was the only respondent to the RFP. • Significant financial disclosure • The City donated a site next to a new employee garage and close to another garage • There was a convoluted revenue split on parking revenues. That revenue supports the city’s debt service on the new garage. • Deal works for downtown development and sales tax. 90,000 people so far. • Program to acceptable community standards. • 40-year term with 5-year extensions to 65 year maximum.
Next Stage Theater at Grand Prairie, Texas
• Next Stage Theater opened in 2001 with 6,300 seats, convertible down to
2,200 or even 1,800 seats, with a large stage.
• Leo Limbeck approached City with the idea and assembled financing.
• Completed building for $50 million. City bought back for $15 million, then
leased to operating company. City took $150K/year plus suite and other
goodies. Challenges:
– Limbeck undercapitalized. Insufficient money to promote
– Projected more activity then they could deliver
– Did not have partnership with product supplier
• Warburg steps in and takes over. Goes through Chapter 11. Walks away
from $50 million.
• New lease with Anschutz Entertainment (bid against Clear Channel and
House of Blues). May partner also with House of Blues.
• Current level of activity 6-10 shows per month
• Local arts groups do not use the facility.Kodak Theatre, Hollywood, California • Trizec Hahn as developer and owner. 630,000 sf complex costing $400 million including 300,000 sf retail, 70,000 sf food & entertainment, 40,000 sf cinema, 40,000 sf ballroom and 180,000 sf Kodak Theater. • Had preliminary operating deals for 3,700-seat Kodak Theater with Livent and then Australian promoter. Fell through while already in construction. • Four-months from writing RFP to selecting operator • Proposed three-year term with one-year renewal options. • Selection criteria: submission quality and completeness, relevant experience, financial resources, market knowledge, references, innovative approach, union experience, business plan and pro-forma assumptions. • Fifteen firms invited to bid. Anschutz Entertainment selected. • Theatre stays very active. Besides Academy Awards in March, hosts about 15-20 live events per month.
Coral Springs Center for the Arts, Coral Springs, FL • City-owned 1,500-seat facility, independently operated by Property and Facilities Management • PFM uses Clear Channel as one presenter, but is independent. • City of Coral Springs ran originally, but hired PFM in 1993 through RFP process. City pays PFM a standard subsidy of $595,000 each year, and PFM returns to them a net of anywhere from $150,000-$200,000. Average subsidy has been $400,000. Before PFM took over the City subsidy was about $850,000. • Subsidy is reduced yearly. • Programs include Broadway (5 shows, 2-5 perfs each) Concerts (6 shows) Special Engagements (3 shows) Comedy (6 shows) Family/Children (3 shows) Opera (3 shows) Vaudeville (5 shows) Orchestra (2 shows). • 33% discount on rentals to non-profits, which “eases the sting” of not getting scheduling preference. Joint marketing also a plus for n/p groups. • Rentals(graduations, religious groups, conventions, etc.) contribute 1/3 of revenue.
(Coral Springs continued…) • PFM takes all the downside risk on the shows coming in, but when a show is very successful, they turn a large profit. The management company has the potential to make a lot of money. • Bread-and-butter series, the Broadway series, has precedence in scheduling and anchors the program financially. • Programs get scheduling preference in order of money-making potential. • Local politics should not enter in as it is a private entity. Even so, manager seeks to build positive relationships with local arts groups. • Arts groups must clearly understand that this is a for-profit venture and for that reason money-making groups get precedence.
Operator Insights • City should use RFP process to explore several potential operators to find one that is committed to the unique mission of the facility. Start with an RFP, even if only one firm responds. • Select an operator with access to product and ability to operate. • Contract must be flexible, including best and worst case scenarios and buy-out provisions. • Contract should include provisions of intervention should operator not run the theater in an acceptable manner. • Project may have only limited downtown impacts. People eat and drink inside the building. • Visit and discuss experience with other facility operators • Include a large lobby – special events and lobby functions (car shows, conventions, etc.) are key to financial success. • These venues are businesses and should be run as a business.
The Event Center - Estimates of Financial Performance
• There are few comparable facilities whose financial performance is public
information. And financial performance for the Event Center very much
depends on the operator and the programming they secure. Nevertheless,
we have estimated financial performance based on activity, as follows:
Activity and Attendance Use Days Attendance
Presented Events 72 158,400
ADF Rentals 45 33,000
Other Rentals 69 79,200
Total Event Center 186 270,600
Event Center Earned Revenues
Sur-charge
Event Center Earned Revenues
User Fees
Presenting $5,844,000
Concessions
Rental Income $211,000
Rental Income
Concessions $279,180
User Fees $272,200
Sur-charge $333,960
Total $6,940,340 PresentingThe Event Center - Estimates of Financial Performance
• Operating expenses total $6 million, leaving a $1 million operating profit.
This does not include any debt service, capital reserve or payment of rent
from the operator to the City.
Event Center Operating Expenses
Event Center Operating Expenses
Presenting $3,632,700 Operations
Administration $1,005,000 Ticket Office
Ticket Office $333,774
Operations $984,910
Administration Presenting
Total $5,956,384
Operating Profit $983,956The Convertible Event Center - Selecting an Operator
• We would advocate City ownership and a commercial operator for the Event
Center given the commercial upside of the facility and the skills required.
• There is a proposal from SES, a lingering indication of interest from Clear
Channel, and a group of other potential operators. Within that group, Clear
Channel is key as the ones with the product necessary to activate the space.
• We would advocate an RFP process to select an operator, as a means to:
– Build internal consensus on how facilities should be operated
– Evaluate proposals in an open and competitive fashion
– Develop a renewable operating contract
– Formalize relationship with arts users
• One of the great attractions for a potential operator, and of significant value to
the City, is the ancillary development potential that comes with the Event
Center. It will be important to determine is that development becomes a part of
the Operator’s deal, or is treated separately.
• One final related question is whether to pursue a design/build relationship in
conjunction with selecting an operator, or to treat that as another separate
transaction.The Event Center - Pursuing a Contractual Relationship
• Following are possible criteria for the City to select an operator:
– Share of capital costs
– Share of operating costs
– Limits on financial risk to the City
– Guarantees on quantity and quality of programming
– The presence of local partners
– How regional arts groups are accommodated
– Economic impacts on the communityThe Mid-size Hall - Ownership and Operating Relationships
• Presuming that this new hall is owned by the City, there are several
options on how a new hall might be operated:
– By a City department or agency
– By the Carolina Theater
– By the Event Center operator
– By an educational institution
– By a new non-profit organization
• We would recommend that the Carolina Theater be the operator of these
new facilities given:
– Potential economies of scale
– The ability to program multiple facilities
– Their interests as a municipal agency
– Their ability to plan for operations well in advance of new
facilities
• We would re-consider that recommendation if NCCU or Duke were to step
forward and seek a role as partner in this project.The Mid-size Hall - Pro-forma Operating Budget
• Here are preliminary estimates of earned revenues and operating
expenses in the hall.
Mid-size Theater Earned Revenues
Mid-size Theater Earned Revenues
Presenting $343,400
Sur-charge
Rental Income $75,000 User Fees
Concessions $85,586 Presenting
User Fees $163,238
Sur-charge $44,006 Concessions
Rental Income
Total $711,229
Mid-size Theater Operating Expenses
Presenting $274,720 Mid-size Theater Op Expense
Administration $232,500
Ticket Office $86,973
Presenting
Operations $535,035
Operations
Total $1,129,228
Funding Requirement $(417,999)
ER/OE 63% Administration
Ticket OfficeThe Arts in American Tobacco - Ownership and Operating
• Duke University has made a provisional commitment to assist ADF in their
plan to develop space in the American Tobacco project.
• As to potential operators, there are several choices:
– ADF as operator
– Duke as operator, with an agreement to accommodate ADF
– A third-party operator
• We would recommend that ADF be the operator of these facilities as a
means to build their year-round programs and to demonstrate their longer
term commitment to Durham.
• Critical to the operation of these facilities will be their use by other local
arts groups and schools. There is significant demand for high-quality
rehearsal space in the community, and the availability of these facilities will
have a significant impact on the local arts community.
• In an ideal scenario, these facilities are used by ADF, local arts groups,
Duke, NCCU and local schools.Arts in American Tobacco - Pro-forma Operating Budget
Arts in Am Tobacco Earned Revenues
Arts in Am Tobacco Earned Revenues
Rental Income $37,500 Space Rentals
Rental Income
Concessions $18,000
User Fees $9,900
Space Rentals $30,000 User Fees
Concessions
Total $95,400
Arts in Am Tobacco Operating Expenses
Administration $55,000 Arts in Am Tobacco Op Expense
Ticket Office $25,000
Operations $132,000
Administration
Total $212,000
Funding Requirement $(116,600)
ER/OE 45% Operations Ticket OfficePATRONS Economic Impacts
• New arts facilities can have a
A substantial economic impact on the
community, including the impacts of
B
construction and the impacts of the
CULTURAL
INSTITUTION operation.
E C
• A critical element is the ancillary
BUSINESSES H D
GOVERNMENT
spending associated with the Center
G as attenders eat, drink and/or shop
J I
before or after a performance.
F EMPLOYEES
JOBS-INCOME
• All of these impacts are then subject to
a multiplier to reflect how those funds
are spent and re-spent in the
Direct Economic Effects
economy.
Secondary Economic Effects
Third Order (Multiplier) EffectsImpacts of Construction
Geography Durham MSA Event Center Arts in Am Tobacco Mid-size Theater
Industry Other Construction
Project Costs $45,000,000 $5,000,000 $18,000,000
Final Demand Multipliers Project Outputs Project Outputs Project Outputs
Output 1.32 $59,400,000 $6,600,000 $23,760,000
Earnings 0.1931 $8,689,500 $965,500 $3,475,800
Employment 6.5 292.50 32.50 117.00Impacts of Operation
Arts in Am
Event Center Mid-size Hall Tobacco
Incremental Operating Expenditures $725,000 $410,000 $85,000
Incremental Output $915,053 $524,327 $108,245
Incremental Earnings $108,239 $65,424 $15,874
Incremental Employment 4.59 2.99 0.55Ancillary Spending Impacts
Ancillary Impacts Summary Event Center Arts in AM Tobacco Mid-size Hall
Total Incremental Attendance 275,000 20,000 55,000
Durham Attendance 137,500 14,000 33,000
Regional (non-Durham) Attendance 82,500 5,000 16,500
Visiting Attendance 55,000 1,000 5,500
Total Output Total Output Total Output
Regional (Non-Durham) Attendees
Eating and Drinking $1,063,021 $64,426 $212,604
Retail Trade $124,223 $7,529 $24,845
Local/Suburban Transit& Highways $261,355 $15,840 $52,271
Hotels $234,856 $14,234 $46,971
Sub-total $1,683,456 $102,028 $336,691
Visiting Attendance
Eating and Drinking $1,072,598 $19,502 $107,260
Retail Trade $95,155 $1,730 $9,515
Local/Suburban Transit& Highways $418,460 $7,608 $41,846
Hotels $573,359 $10,425 $57,336
Sub-total $2,159,571 $39,265 $215,957
Total Impact of Ancillary Spending $3,843,027 $141,293 $552,648Funding Plan
Sources Uses - Capital
• City of Durham • Convertible Event Center
• Other government • Arts in American Tobacco
• Individuals • Mid-size hall
• Foundations • Endowment
• Corporate
• Duke Uses - Operating
• Developer/Operator • Convertible Event Center
• Arts in American Tobacco
• Mid-size hall
• Institutional preparationFunding the Convertible Event Center Sources • Bed Tax – Tax in place which should yield as much as $1.4 million per year by 2007. • Prepared Food Tax – Potential additional tax which could yield as much $3.5 million per year if passed. • Corporate Naming Gift – Comparable buildings raise significant funds with naming rights to large corporate sponsors. • Private sector philanthropic support – Additional potential to raise significant private sector dollars if in support of arts and cultural use, with some relationship to educational mission.
Naming Rights for Comparable Facilities
Lead
Total Project Total Private Lead Individual Gift/
Project City Capacity Owner Operator
Budget Sector Gift Total
Budget
BTI Center Raleigh, NC 2200, 1100, 600 City City $ 40,000,000 $ 18,000,000 $ 6,000,000 15%
Benaroya Hall Seattle, WA 2500, 538 City N/P $ 124,000,000 $ 159,000,000 $ 16,640,000 13%
Chan Shun Centre Vancouver, BC 1400, 350, 200 Univ. Univ. $ 25,000,000 $ - $ 15,000,000 60%
Dodge Theatre Phoenix, AZ 5000 City SFX $ 34,000,000 $ 34,000,000 $ 5,000,000 15%
Kodak Theatre** Hollywood, CA 3500 Private $ 615,000,000 $ 545,000,000 $ 70,000,000 11%
Eisemann Center Richardson, TX 1500, 370, 200 City City $ 40,000,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 2,000,000 5%
Hobby Center Houston, TX 2650, 500 City N/P $ 92,000,000 $ 81,310,000 $ 15,000,000 16%
Kimmel Center Philadelphia, PA 2500, 650 N/P N/P $ 265,000,000 $ 159,000,000 $ 30,000,000 11%
Kravis Center W. Palm Beach, FL 2500, 540 City N/P $ 55,000,000 $ 10,000,000 $ 5,000,000 9%
Long Center Austin, TX 1900, 720, 250 City N/P $ 89,000,000 $ 89,000,000 $ 20,000,000 22%
Mondavi Center Davis, CA 1800, 250 Univ. N/P $ 60,900,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 10,000,000 16%
Blumenthal Center Charlotte, NC 2100, 434, 150 City N/P $ 62,000,000 $ 32,000,000 $ 4,000,000 6%
Peace Center Greenville, NC 2100, 400 City N/P $ 42,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 10,000,000 24%
RiverCenter* Columbus, GA 1000 Gov't N/P $ 100,000,000 $ 33,000,000 $ 50,000,000 50%
*total project included more than $20 mil capital grants to other cultural institutions in Columbus
** total project budget included a hotel, the theatre and a retail and restaurant development, the city paid for and operates a 3000 space
parking garage underneath the facility, and they did contribute money to the overall development cost. The main developer for the project
was Trizec. The Kodak Theatre alone cost $94 millionPublic Sector Public Repayment
Project City Capacity Owner Operator Public Source
Public Sector Support for Comparable Facilities Financing Plan
parking fund,
benefactor gifts, Room tax and food
BTI Center Raleigh, NC 2200, 1100, 600 City City $ 22,000,000
mainly a lump sum tax
of tax revenue
Rosemont Theatre Rosemont, IL 5000 Village Village Municipal bonds TIF financing plan
Oakdale Theatre Wallingford, CT 5000 SFX SFX Municipal bonds TIF financing plan
debt service paid
from 3000-space
Dodge Theatre Phoenix, AZ 5000 City SFX $ - City donated site
parking garage
adjacent to facility
Kodak Theatre** Hollywood, CA 3500 Private Private $ 70,000,000
hotel/motel tax
Eisemann Center Richardson, TX 1500, 370, 200 City City $ 34,000,000 City funds
revenues
Hobby Center Houston, TX 2650, 500 City N/P $ 10,690,000
City donated site
one cent sales tax
Kravis Center W. Palm Beach, FL 2500, 540 City N/P $ 45,000,000 and $5 million for
referendum
construction
$15 million bond
Blumenthal Center Charlotte, NC 2100, 434, 150 City N/P $ 30,000,000
referendum
City bought and
developed site for
$6.02 million, with
Peace Center Greenville, NC 2100, 400 City N/P $ 12,000,000
county and state
grants of $7.25
million
Georgia State
RiverCenter* Columbus, GA 1000 Gov't N/P $ 67,000,000 bonds and City
funds
Benaroya Hall Seattle, WA 2500, 538 City N/P $ (35,000,000)Durham Arts Facilities Plan and Schedule Year 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Month 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 Event Center Write RFP Issue RFP Review Responses Short List and Interviews Select Operator Contract Negotiations Contract Completion Schematic Design Design Development Contract Documents Bid Period Construction Commissioning Opening ADF in Am Tobacco Fundraising Plan Fundraising Partnership Agreement Schematic Design Design Development Contract Documents Bid Period Construction Commissioning Opening Mid-size Theater Fundraising Plan Fundraising Partnership Agreement Site Selection Schematic Design Design Development Contract Documents Bid Period Construction Commissioning Opening
Next Steps
• Event Center
– Confirm capital funding sources
– Issue RFP for operation and/or design/build
– Site planning and preparation
– ADF commitment
• Arts in American Tobacco
– Re-affirm Duke and ADF commitment to project
– Proceed as and when funds available
• Mid-size Theater
– Explore Carolina Theater partnership
– Develop capital campaign strategy and test potential
–Partnerships with schools, arts organizations, and others
–Capacity-building for local arts organizations
• Existing Facility Improvements
– Hayti Center
– Carolina TheatreYou can also read
